difference in treatment Iraq - N. Korea

Archive of the Sojourn3 General Discussion Forum.
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

difference in treatment Iraq - N. Korea

Postby cherzra » Tue Dec 31, 2002 1:40 pm

So any supporters of attacking Iraq care to explain to me the following?

Iraq - no proof has been found of any ABC weapons. US claims to "have proof" but has somehow not shown it in all these months. Cooperates fully with inspectors. US is obviously going to war and everything else is just salad dressing to make Joe Schmoe accept it.

N. Korea - they have admitted to be secretly working on a nuclear weapons program. They recently reactivated a reactor which supplies almost no energy, but which produces weapons-grade plutonium for 2-3 A-bombs per year. Kicks all UN inspectors out of the country. Somehow the US wants to "talk" and try "diplomatic efforts".


Saddam was YOUR ally for decades, YOU funded him and gave him the means to make chemical weapons. When he used gas on his own people, Runsfeld and other Americans were there to shake his hand and secure more US influence with their middle eastern friend. Now he's out of your grace for obvious (oil) reasons, and even though you can't prove him having any weapons you still want to attack him.

N. Korea has always been your "enemy", yet while they are openly working on weapons of mass destruction Bush wants to treat them with satin gloves. Their government killed more of their own people than Saddam, the difference being a factor, oh, 500-1000 perhaps.


So, anyone want to enlighten me? I'm obviously an idiot for not understanding.
Iktar
Sojourner
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Iktar » Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:05 pm

I'm not supporter of Iraq conflict but I think there's few reasons why US would rather avoid head on combat with North Korea. These are my opinions.

1. Military Strength
2. Location
3. Current Political Ties in Asia
4. Current Motives

North Korea's military is far superior to Iraq and if US did goto war with North Korea. The casualty would be far heavier.

North Korea is border with Russia and China. Even though China is cool with US. China would have second thoughts if US had large military force stationed on their border. Which will have to be done if US do engage North Korea and defeat North Korea.

US has two main base in Asia which is in Japan and South Korea. Current political ties with South Korea isn't good as it used to be. There is lots of anti-US sentiments and South Korea have no intention of going into any sort of conflict.

Oil. US is already planning out how to use Iraq's oil to rebuild Iraq's economy and stuff when US occupation of Iraq starts. There is no natural resource like that in North Korea to help pay for rebuilding plus North Korea's economy is in far worse shape than Iraq so it would also cost a tons more.

Thats my two cents!
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:36 pm

I think iktar pretty much summed it up. I would only add one thing...

The North Korean regime has been on the verge of collapse for a while now. Interestingly enough, its the US that has kept this from happening. We have been propping that state up with deliveries of food and oil because we want to avoid destabalizing the region. Who knows what would happen if the North Korean leadership became convinced that its backs were to the wall? They might release their hordes of gun wielding half-starved soldiers onto South Korea for one thing. Or perhaps extort food and currency from japan by making a credible threat to send missiles into their largest cities.

The point is that while North Korea has the US by the balls, we also have them by the balls as well. This means that a deal should be able to be worked out. We would rather encapsulate them than fight them because there are a lot of reasons (iktar stated them clearly) why we want nothing to do with a war in that region. Unfortunately, North Korea has undermined its own credibility by reneging on a prior deal. My impression though is that the US and its allies would like to get that process going again (with adequate safeguards this time)

As for Iraq, we have none of the same reasons for wanting to avoid a war. We would suffer less casaulties. Destabalizing the region is considered a positive thing because frankly the status quo is unnacceptable. There is also proof that Hussein has provided material benefits to Al Queda and other terrorist organizations in the region. Last, but certainly not least, is of course, ensuring that the world oil supply remains unthreatened (and using access to Iraqi oil as a way of rewarding or punishing our friends depending on how friendly they have been recently).

This is realpolitik. Invading north korea is not in the best interests of america. Invading Iraq is. You sarcastically say, Cherzra, that you must be an 'idiot' for not understanding. But really, this is all there is to understand. The US policy springs from self interest only. Once you get that down, it all falls into place. I think, though, that you already knew this.

Corth

------------------
Goddamned slippery mage.
mezheru
Sojourner
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 6:01 am
Location: springfield, va, usa

Postby mezheru » Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:37 pm

I'm not sure of all the reasons, or even most of the reasons, why we're treating one differently than the other, but rest assured there ARE reasons, and our leaders are more subtle than many people realize. Anyone remember the Taliban? That was done about as well as a person could do it, in my opinion - whether you agree that it should have been done or not (I personally think that it should have been done). What the world needs is a good dose of 18th century ass kicking: if you have the capacity to destroy your enemies, then you should. I stopped being a flower-wielding liberal anthropology graduate the day 19 assholes blew up 3 buildings and 4 airplains.

Differences between Iraq and North Korea:
1) Iraq invaded kuwait, North Korea hasn't invaded anyone (South Korea...I don't see that as invasion, it was internal).
2) Sadam has shown a willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, Korea hasn't
3) The Korean situation just started. When Iraq invaded back in 1990 (91?) we tried a shit load of diplomacy, followed with might. We tried it recently too, and heck, we even let the UN get involved, even though we didn't have to. 10 years later we are being diplomatic with Iraq, and they scream "double standard". There's no double standard - if Korea threatened us and we felt threatened, we'd magnetize them.
4) Iraq gives money and support to terrorists, and haven to Al Qaida. Even if they were only smiling in the direction of a terrorist, I'd still want to magnetize them. North Korea, though they sell weapons to folks, are doing it for money - which means that they can be bought, ie. dealt with diplomatically.

Personally, I think we should annhialate all of our enemies. I'm tired of all these wars we win where our enemies get to keep their lives. Its not pretty, but there's nothing pretty about violence. Violence is going to happen to us, or it is going to happen to them. And the world should listen when Mr. Bush says that our friends will be judged by their actions (or inaction).

hawkishly yours,
Mezheru
Snurgt
Sojourner
Posts: 301
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 5:01 am
Contact:

Postby Snurgt » Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:47 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by mezheru:
<B>I stopped being a flower-wielding liberal anthropology graduate the day 19 assholes blew up 3 buildings and 4 airplanes.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think thats one of the best lines I've read on here.

------------------
Snurgt take no prisoner.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:50 pm

kolasi
Sojourner
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 6:01 am
Location: washington DC usa

Postby kolasi » Tue Dec 31, 2002 3:55 pm

Well for one, Im glad that the hippocracy is ending in the States. Thats one thing that i could never digest. It used to be that the States would supposedly do things to help "Democracy" or "Avoid human catastrophe" which always meant intervening in countries where the govt didnt cooperate with the US. If yu were a vicious dictator (Mobutu, the Saudi Kings, countless dictators in S.aAmerica, even Saddam and the Taliban) and played ball with the US you were OK. But if yuo didnt, you would be attacked in the name of Liberty and Freedom!
At least now, the US protects its interests and does what it does because....it can!
That has been the case thrughout history, even the ancient Athenians destroyed many cities to force them to become part of the democratic delian league.
Im not happy with whats going on in the world, but thats just how it is. The powerful stay powerful because they dont let anyone else become powerful.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Tue Dec 31, 2002 4:11 pm

mezheru
Sojourner
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 6:01 am
Location: springfield, va, usa

Postby mezheru » Tue Dec 31, 2002 4:24 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Corth:
<B>http://www.denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/12/Fightingintwotheaters.shtml

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quote from this link, for folks who hate going to links:

It is a truism of negotiations that if one party is up against a deadline and the other is not, the one in a hurry is at a disadvantage. So it is frustrating the North Koreans mightily that the US government refuses to even talk to them, and shows no sign that it considers the situation urgent.

Most of the announcements made by various US government officials recently have been intending primarily to indicate to the North Korean government that we're not impressed by what they've been doing the last few days, and that we're not going to be rushed into making a foolish deal with them. That is exactly the right message to be sending to North Korea right now, and I'm glad that's what our government is actually doing.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:32 am

Corth, that's one of the most intelligent posts I've ever seen on the BBS.

------------------
- Ragorn
Rondandal tells you 'I take it your goal is to clash?'
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Wed Jan 01, 2003 7:25 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by mezheru:
<B>What the world needs is a good dose of 18th century ass kicking: if you have the capacity to destroy your enemies, then you should. I stopped being a flower-wielding liberal anthropology graduate the day 19 assholes blew up 3 buildings and 4 airplains.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And why is Iraq your enemy? Have you forgotten that they were your friends for the longest of times? They have nothing to do with Al Qaeda, except for the "proof" that Bush claims to have (and that he doesn't show). BTW, I don't think you'd get very far fighting the world. Planes don't win wars or occupy land, ground troops do.


[This message has been edited by cherzra (edited 01-01-2003).]
Xisiqomelir
Sojourner
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Postby Xisiqomelir » Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:21 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
<B> Planes don't win wars or occupy land, ground troops do.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And North Korea has the world's fourth largest army.

------------------
Thus spake Shevarash: "Invokers are not going to be removed"
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:22 pm

america would kick the worlds' ass one nation after another.
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:32 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Daz:
america would kick the worlds' ass one nation after another.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh really? Well maybe you can start in Vietnam then. Oh, to suffer defeat at the hands of peasants who have nothing but kalashnikovs...


You'd have a hard time in Iraq without all the help from other nations, that's for sure.

Safely bombing 3rd world nations from the air and claiming "victory" != winning a real ground war.


[This message has been edited by cherzra (edited 01-01-2003).]
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:03 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
<B> Oh really? Well maybe you can start in Vietnam then. Oh, to suffer defeat at the hands of peasants who have nothing but kalashnikovs...


You'd have a hard time in Iraq without all the help from other nations, that's for sure.

Safely bombing 3rd world nations from the air and claiming "victory" != winning a real ground war.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And what is your point Cherzra, that Americans are cowards who foolishly believe they have a strong military? Ok, consider your point made...

Corth

------------------
Goddamned slippery mage.
mezheru
Sojourner
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 6:01 am
Location: springfield, va, usa

Postby mezheru » Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:05 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
<B> And why is Iraq your enemy? Have you forgotten that they were your friends for the longest of times? They have nothing to do with Al Qaeda, except for the "proof" that Bush claims to have (and that he doesn't show). BTW, I don't think you'd get very far fighting the world. Planes don't win wars or occupy land, ground troops do.


[This message has been edited by cherzra (edited 01-01-2003).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1)I guess Saddam is our enemy more than "Iraq" is, as are all governments that oppose us. This is simply tug-of-war, Cherzra. They oppose us, we smash them. This is the way its suposed to work, and a lot of harm can come to everyone if we allow pacifism to hold our punches. They'd destroy us if they could - don't you think for a second they wouldn't. And any arguments like "But America is/should be the shining example" are just so much bullshit. We've given enough money and blood so that we don't need to prove anything anymore.
2) I've never seen Japan, but I believe it is there. I've never met you, though I believe you exist. Sometimes you don't have to see it to know it is there. Anyone who thinks Saddam doesn't have weapons of mass destruction, and ties to Al Qaida, for lack of "proof" is simply wrong. Unfortunately the only way we'll ever prove it is to either let him go (ease sanctions, pull out inspectors, etc.) or invade. Personally, I don't want to let him live long enough to seek revenge. Screw the sumbitch.
3) By "the world" I meant they needed to see that we were serious, not that I wanted to go to war with the world (a serious waste of lives, totally nutty). They'd see this by the way we conduct ourselves militarily. In the past, we did these little strikes designed to fly under the radar of the world's notice. We didn't want to stir up trouble. Unfortunately, it just made us look cowardly. What they didn't understand was that for the last 50 years we've been trying our best to be "shining examples" to everyone, only to have it kicked back into our faces. So I say: nuke Korea if they actually look dangerous, invade Iraq and hang Saddam, then deal with Iran, then anyone else who didnt immediately lay down and play dead.
mezheru
Sojourner
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 6:01 am
Location: springfield, va, usa

Postby mezheru » Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:10 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
<B> Oh really? Well maybe you can start in Vietnam then. Oh, to suffer defeat at the hands of peasants who have nothing but kalashnikovs...
You'd have a hard time in Iraq without all the help from other nations, that's for sure.
Safely bombing 3rd world nations from the air and claiming "victory" != winning a real ground war.

[This message has been edited by cherzra (edited 01-01-2003).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

We didn't win in Vietnam because our leaders were being "shining examples" (see above). And we beat Iraq in a ground war - remember all those surrenders? We outflanked them with our tanks and nailed them one by one before they even saw us - from the ground. We didn't go in and finish things because we were being "shining examples" again. And as far as help from the world? Bullshit again. All those folks who helped us were there to make it look like a coalition - we didn't need them. And when they showed up, they were using our equipment, or their own equipment bought with our money. All it takes for America to succeed in battle is the will of the people - and we now have that, thanks to Osama and 19 of his buddies.
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:22 pm

You call that a ground war? Please, that was nothing but a 1 week tank/chopper shooting range under perfect conditions. A dozen 90's MBTs supported by 10 AWACS/sattelites and other units vs a dozen 60's MBTs does not equal a ground war. As for not needing allies... right. I wonder why so many non-US forces are covering gaps in your army and logistics then. Lastly... I don't quite think other countries buy their equipment with free money from the US.
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:32 pm

You really use Vietnam as an example of modern day US military capabilities?

Did you miss the technological revolution that has left America alone on top of the world?
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:39 pm

If I recall correctly, the Vietcong had nothing except simple rifles and a few SAMs. The US had everything. You mean a difference like that?

Besides, your new 3 grid/mesh system is notoriously unreliable and only works under the best of circumstances. I wouldn't bet the lives of MY soldiers on it.
mezheru
Sojourner
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 6:01 am
Location: springfield, va, usa

Postby mezheru » Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:01 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
You call that a ground war? Please, that was nothing but a 1 week tank/chopper shooting range under perfect conditions. A dozen 90's MBTs supported by 10 AWACS/sattelites and other units vs a dozen 60's MBTs does not equal a ground war. As for not needing allies... right. I wonder why so many non-US forces are covering gaps in your army and logistics then. Lastly... I don't quite think other countries buy their equipment with free money from the US.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Anything they are doing for us is appreciated, but hardly necessary. It is simply diplomacy. When Benjamin Franklin wanted someone to get along with him, he'd paradoxically let them do him a favor. It made them feel good and reduced tensions.
Now, you say it wasn't much of a ground war - thanks for proving my point. We got their whole army - a million strong, bigger than ours - to surrender (or die). And that wasn't even the bulk of our might. consider that we have 40K troops in Korea, I don't know how many through Europe, Japan, and a bunch of places I probably can't even pronounce. You don't get it...America wins when Americans want to. Its only a matter of how much blood our people can stomach - and right now, we've very bloodthirsty. Consider that we now have a replublican senate, house and a president to boot. Its as if the majority of Americans turned around and yelled "charge!" at the same time. If I turn on the TV tonight and learn that George W. Bush launched a major attack on Iraq, and bombed that power plant in Korea, it wouldn't surprise me - and very few Americans would give a shit (not counting Berkley, the folks who declared 60 miles above their city a "no weapons in space zone", of all things - we should bomb them too).

Didn't a bunch of people say we'd lose in Afghanistan? Didn't we do what the Russians couldn't (wouldn't, more likely)? Do you really think the pitifully outfitted and scattered Northern Alliance won the day? They replaced about 10 more jets and 3 tanks, 10 cruise missiles and maybe 500 troops, tops.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:08 am

As Cherzra has to go back 40 years to find a war America clearly lost. And even then, only because our own country didn't support the war.

------------------
- Ragorn
Rondandal tells you 'I take it your goal is to clash?'
Xisiqomelir
Sojourner
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Postby Xisiqomelir » Thu Jan 02, 2003 2:50 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ragorn:
<B>As Cherzra has to go back 40 years to find a war America clearly lost. And even then, only because our own country didn't support the war.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, don't knock the Vietnam war. The phrase "Let's frag the Lieutenant" was one of the few things that helped me endure the years of National Slavery.



------------------
Thus spake Shevarash: "Invokers are not going to be removed"
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:53 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ragorn:
<B>As Cherzra has to go back 40 years to find a war America clearly lost. And even then, only because our own country didn't support the war.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, because that was the last real war you fought. Or would you call invading Grenada (ooh impressive one indeed), Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan a war?
Iktar
Sojourner
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 5:01 am

Postby Iktar » Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:07 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
No, because that was the last real war you fought. Or would you call invading Grenada (ooh impressive one indeed), Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan a war?</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correction, Korean war was the last real war. Approiately named "the forgotten war" coz everyone forgets it.

and i think Panama was conflict not war, not sure on dat one.

[This message has been edited by Iktar (edited 01-02-2003).]
Mikayla
Sojourner
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 5:01 am
Location: orange, tx, USA
Contact:

Postby Mikayla » Thu Jan 02, 2003 7:02 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
No, because that was the last real war you fought. Or would you call invading Grenada (ooh impressive one indeed), Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan a war?</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


cherzra my dad fought in nam, my aunt/his sister spat on him calling him a baby killer, to me tells me that the american people did not back that war, the last real war that americans backed was called WW II. and we know what happened there Image


------------------
Her Royal Bitchness Eye Aeturnum
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:52 pm

Vietnam was a conflict, not a war.
Mikayla
Sojourner
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 5:01 am
Location: orange, tx, USA
Contact:

Postby Mikayla » Fri Jan 03, 2003 2:00 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Daz:
Vietnam was a conflict, not a war.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


thats not what my dad would say daz


------------------
Her Royal Bitchness Eye Aeturnum
Lyt
Sojourner
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Lyt » Fri Jan 03, 2003 10:59 pm

Let's get to the real root of Cherzra's post. He hates the United States. Anything we support, he is against. It almost sounds to me like he is French. By the way Cherzra, what piss poor crappy lame European country are you from anyways? Europe is a nice place to visit, and an even better place to leave.

What is the last great thing that your country has done anyways? Has it done anything of note? (Within the last 500 years mind you) You are jealous of our country's freedoms, wealth, influence in the world, and lack of an 80% income tax. Oh, and we aren't socialists either, so that probably makes you mad. I won't even bring up ownership of guns. Guns don't kill people, pissed off people like me kill them! Image

Every thread of yours that I see on here generally has the same tone. Anything the US does is inherently bad. Maybe we should have let Hitler keep your craphole country you live in. If you had lived back then, you would have probably opposed the US jumping to the side of the British.

I am more than prepared for you to flame me back. I don't post very often, and will not respond to anything you post, so go ahead and rip into me. Why don't you do us all a favor and find some European MUD, where everyone thinks the same way you do, and then you can leave us alone. I wouldn't mind if the US shut its borders, and told the rest of the world to take a flying leap. Maybe then you would realize how bad the world would really be if we weren't around. Have a nice day.

Lyt

------------------
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Fri Jan 03, 2003 11:22 pm

Thanks for writing my post on why the rest of the world dislikes you Lyt!
Kerath
Sojourner
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Postby Kerath » Fri Jan 03, 2003 11:36 pm

I've been keeping tabs on the BBS, and from what I've seen, for every person that takes an all-out anti-American stance, there's about 20 of you who jump in and claim that the US is infallible and almighty. Both arguments are rather silly.

What's the point of even posting that kind of thoughtless, knee-jerk crap? (No offense intended. Really. I just can't wrap my head around it. Although it'd be damn cool if I could go around wrapping my head around things)

Oh, and BTW, if the US does as Lyt says and closes its borders entirely, I hope you folks will have fun burning coal again for electricity, since the way I understand it, we Canucks provide the vast majority of your uranium for nuclear plants, and if you shut us out, we'll just keep it Image That's just to name one of many commodities acquired through trade that are important or vital in a modern, working society. Bellybutton-gazing won't get you anywhere.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Fri Jan 03, 2003 11:55 pm

.

[This message has been edited by Corth (edited 01-03-2003).]
Ikkev
Sojourner
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2002 6:01 am

Postby Ikkev » Sat Jan 04, 2003 1:20 am

heh,I'd mind if the US shut its borders :P

If you do say anything unholy about the US,yes there will be people to back it up.

What do you expect? If I said,Canada sucks,blame Canada,I'm sure someone would come up and try to ream me a new asshole about how good Canada is.

The wide varieties of subjects this BBS covers is sickening. Half of them,real people don't want to hear about.

------------------

Bhinder (Dwarf) stands here.
Zouve
Sojourner
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 5:01 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Postby Zouve » Sat Jan 04, 2003 2:08 am

This thread is a good example of why I stopped reading Usenet years ago. There is always some troll (hey, Cherzra is a trolling troll!) looking to make a point with facts just vague enough to start a fight. Then the "Sez You!" side chimes in, the personal insults start to fly, and nothing results but spam, with neither side looking like shining examples of intellect.

Even in the face of this, I have a bone to pick with one of Cherzra's statements that everybody seems to have taken as true. Iraq was hardly a US ally, ever. In the context of the cold war, Iraq played the game between NATO and the USSR trying to get the most freebies out of it. NATO played (not just the US... France built the reactors for his nuke plants, the Germans built his bunkers, and a few NATO countries sold him aircraft) this game because the Soviets were in there and oil for Western Europe and the US was at stake. But in the end, the Gulf war was allied forces tearing up an army organized along Soviet lines, with Soviet equipment, Soviet tanks, Soviet APC's, a Soviet air defense system, and a mostly Soviet air force. They were hardly an ally. A partner in trade, yes, and ally, no.

Zouve, who should know better than to even try to make a point in a thread like this...
thanuk
Sojourner
Posts: 1902
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 5:01 am
Contact:

Postby thanuk » Sat Jan 04, 2003 2:47 am

Threads like this make me all warm and fuzzy inside. You people are silly. America obviously dominates the world in military strength, as well as numerous other areas. Cherzra's examples are short-sighted, and if you would all just stop flaming him and pick apart his argument this would be a lot more amusing to read.

Lets start with vietnam. Our "war" that wasn't really a war but i guess we should call it a war, simply due to the duration. America obviously had the power to take over and occupy this country. The problem was that vietnamese were using guerilla tactics, and so you did not know who the enemy was. Now, if America was desperate to win this war, they would've just executed citizens and civilians on the street for the simple reason that they could possibly be the enemy. However, it goes back to the U.S. "setting an example", so we chose instead to stand idly by and be picked off by guerilla soldiers disguised as our allies. Add to this the reluctance of the government to use its full military power, so we would send a minimal number of troops each year to die off slowly, holding their ground, rather than invade the entire country with full military force and destroy the pesky rebel nation. The same thing happened in the states during the revolution, England was just not willing to donate the amount of manpower and supplies that would be necessary to win the war, so they didn't win the war. The U.S. lost the vietnam conflict because they were not willing to go to the lengths of brutality it would take to win the war, and the country did not support it.

The United States would have little problem destroying Iraq barring any outside help. The only "help" we would need to win this war is to expect other nations not to supply the Iraqi army with weapons, and even if they did, we would just stop them from being delivered as we have air and naval superiority. The non-u.s. forces covering the gaps in our army are just trophies to make the U.N. feel good. The U.S. is notorious for this. We go in and do all the neccessary damage to enemy intelligence and communications, usually accompanied by the british, the only other country who could be considered a force in either iraq situation. After the dirty work is done and the iraqis are on the ropes, we send in a nice squad of U.N. soldiers from various countries to claim the victory, and show everyone how nice we all worked, hand in hand, while in reality its the U.S. military doing all the work. Yes it was a 1 week ground and chopper shooting range, because that is all it took, because Iraq barely has enough military strength to control their own country, let alone fight a world superpower.

The United States couldn't take on the entire world at the same time and win, but we would come damn close. We are the 4th largest nation in the world population wise, we have the strongest military. The 3 countries with greater populations than us are poverty stricken in a great deal of their central population. China and India have a billion people each, and half of them are starving...starving peasants are not a threat.

The European countries that show enough military power are all our allies, and even if we were to fight them, there is so much distrust between these nations that it would be doubtful they could combine to fight as one army in time to stop a U.S. invasion. Sadly, the greatest threat to the United States in a U.S. vs. the world situation would be canada, as they are the only country with the population, technology, and money to really pose a serious threat. They also share a large border with the United States. So, sad as it really is, the only real world threat to the united states as of today is canada. Of course, clinton sold all the ICBM secrets to China, so they will represent a serious threat in the very near future. But iraq, and north korea? Please. The real difficulty the U.S. is having is trying to find a happy medium between letting these countries get away with their little shitfits and not looking like cold-hearted tyrants to the rest of the world. I, personally, think we should just completely destroy the current Iraqi government and leave it to their own people to clean up the mess, but that wouldn't be humanitarian, so we would have to occupy the country if we wanted to do this. As for north korea, it seems we are taking the cold-hearted route for once, and i like it. We will simply let these people starve until they have their own coup and overthrow their government, the only real worry is that we neutralize any nuclear threat that exists in this country in the process. There is no real threat here, unless Korea manages to start building nuclear weapons. Iraq may have chemical weapons, but we have a good idea of where they all are, and these will be the obvious targets of the initial military strikes against them if and when the time comes. You can point out obscure facts and scream your head off, but the reality of the world situation currently is that we do not need the help or approval of any nation to eliminate the iraqi or north korean threats to the U.S., and the only reason we accept this assistance from any country other than israel is for political posturing. The U.S. needs no help nor council from any other nation to settle these disputes; the only reason they allow it is so that other governments can smile and say they did their part to eliminate the evil in the world.

------------------
Thanuk Pantherclaw

Gargauth responds to your petition with 'whats your point, we hate you'
Ikkev
Sojourner
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2002 6:01 am

Postby Ikkev » Sat Jan 04, 2003 4:54 am

I'm not gonna even read that whole 4 paragraph reply :P

------------------

Bhinder (Dwarf) stands here.
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Sat Jan 04, 2003 8:27 am

you should, it has 4 paragraphs worth of good points.
gordex
Sojourner
Posts: 265
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 5:01 am
Contact:

Postby gordex » Sat Jan 04, 2003 11:55 am

Thanuk pretty much said it all with regard to what facts are available.

Since my father was a sniper and paper pusher in Vietnam, I feel I can speak factually about it. We never WANTED to win that "war", or it would probably be the world's largest parking lot right now.

Cherza:
Someone already hit this point, but I think it needs to be said again. At what point did you equate "friends" with "Trade Partners". Do you really think that any country is "friends" with any other country? One country has something that the other one wants, so they "trade".

You stated:
"Iraq - no proof has been found of any ABC weapons. US claims to "have proof" but has somehow not shown it in all these months. Cooperates fully with inspectors."

How the hell do YOU, Cherza, know one way or the other? At what point did you personally go talk to Sadaam, or ANYONE from the US government? Where do you get your information from? You don't even live in these countries and are basing your views and beliefs on what you see in the press, of which most are liberal in nature, and will show you only what they want you to see.

As far as Bush not declaring the proof of weapons in Iraq, I am sure there are many reasons.

You stated:
"N. Korea - they have admitted to be secretly working on a nuclear weapons program. They recently reactivated a reactor which supplies almost no energy, but which produces weapons-grade plutonium for 2-3 A-bombs per year. Kicks all UN inspectors out of the country. Somehow the US wants to "talk" and try "diplomatic efforts"."

Why are you equating the UN with US?

/sarcasm
Why don't you send Bush your email address and he can consult with you whenever he has a foreign policy issue? I am sure that your (20ish?) years on this planet have gained you far more intelligence and wisdom than the 100's of people twice, or more, your age in the Bush Administration, Congress, Senate, etc.
/end sarcasm

Since when did you give a shit about Iraq or N. Korea? Perhaps you just want to back your many months of BBS postings of anti-american sentiment with ramblings of issues you don't even have all the facts about? Did you even stop to think that what we are doing might help YOU and YOUR COUNTRY with everyday life that you take for granted? You said in a posting a while ago that you didn't have any issues with us (fellow American mudders) on an individual basis, yet you feel you need to preach about the policies and politics of our government. It is my understanding that you are from Sweden. If this is incorrect, please let me know where you are from.

Sadaam has had it coming for a long time, and we should have finished the job 10 years ago. Let me ask you this. If I punch you in the face, will you punch me back? If I did it a second time, third time? How many times would it take before you are willing to punch me back? You are so self-righteous in your postings about how America is the epitemy of evil. "Judge not lest ye be judged". We are not perfect, but nobody is. Every nation is self serving, and we have more strength than any other nation to serve ourselves better.

You should really get the facts about what you are talking about before you make statements about what is factual.

------------------

Gordex - Gordex Travel Agency

[This message has been edited by gordex (edited 01-04-2003).]
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:39 pm

Wow. After that, all I can say is, "I finally broke down and downloaded Unreal Tournament. It came out 3 years ago, and you people didn't yell at me for not playing? Shame on you!"
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Sat Jan 04, 2003 1:02 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by gordex:
<B>How the hell do YOU, Cherza, know one way or the other?
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The burden of proof is laid upon the accuser, not the accused. You can't go barging around the world, pointing fingers at countries and say, "YOU! You have ABC weapons." And then expect THEM to prove the opposite because that is impossible. Frighteningly enough, that seems to be the way your country starts dealing with people it sees as "threats" too. How many people have been picked up since 9/11 and are STILL being held without any rights? And I don't just mean Afghans but Americans.

<B> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
/sarcasm
Why don't you send Bush your email address and he can consult with you whenever he has a foreign policy issue? I am sure that your (20ish?) years on this planet have gained you far more intelligence and wisdom than the 100's of people twice, or more, your age in the Bush Administration, Congress, Senate, etc.
/end sarcasm
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Judging by his actions, his retard slurring speech, his inability to put together a coherent plan to make the country better while running off like a madman to wage war and the dim look in his eyes, I should say so yes. He's an idiot. His staff are a bunch of yes-men. I would do a better job.

<B> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Since when did you give a shit about Iraq or N. Korea?
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's the act of accusing everyone and everything, the supposed moral supremacy that gives you the right to do as you please all over the world, while you committed horrible crimes yourselves and ignore any international agreement that doesn't suit you. I'd say Bush is right down there on Saddam's level, probably even lower. Actually we all know why Bush really gives a shit about Iraq - oil. Filthy greed and a desire to dominate the Middle East. That's why I give a "shit".

<B> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Let me ask you this. If I punch you in the face, will you punch me back? If I did it a second time, third time? How many times would it take before you are willing to punch me back?
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here is the same-old same-old argument that seems to be intrinsically printed upon all your brains. AL QAEDA IS NOT SADDAM HUSSEIN. Difficult, isn't it? Maybe you should wipe that red cloud from before your eyes before you go charging off with your army and try to think clearly for a while. Since you brought up the "1st punch, 2nd punch, 3rd punch", would you care to tell me what they relate to in the real world? Go on, tell me what Saddam's punches against the US were. And don't go throwing in the invasion of Kuwait, because you did the exact same thing in many countries and it doesn't have any bearing on YOU.

<B> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
You should really get the facts about what you are talking about before you make statements about what is factual.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually I think I have a pretty good idea. And the sentiments in the world seem to be the same way. But we're all wrong right? Let's say that Russia decided to meddle in everyone else's business like you are doing. Pushing, bullying, invading countries, funding Schools of the Americas, rigging elections for decades on end, being friendly with mass murderers and dictators, all the while pretending to serve goodness and democracy. Would you for a second put up with it?

But it's alright to stay on your high moral ground and stay true in your belief that you are entitled to do it. You are, after all, the best.
Jegzed
Sojourner
Posts: 1240
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Jegzed » Sat Jan 04, 2003 1:21 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by gordex:
It is my understanding that you are from Sweden. If this is incorrect, please let me know where you are from.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Damn cuban Image
Cherzra is not from sweden.



------------------
/Jegzed - Sorcere Master - Crimson Coalition
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Sat Jan 04, 2003 1:28 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by cherzra:
But it's alright to stay on your high moral ground and stay true in your belief that you are entitled to do it. You are, after all, the best.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I may be tired . . . did Cherzra just own up?
Mikayla
Sojourner
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 5:01 am
Location: orange, tx, USA
Contact:

Postby Mikayla » Sat Jan 04, 2003 2:33 pm

cherzra you said

Here is the same-old same-old argument that seems to be intrinsically printed upon all your brains. AL QAEDA IS NOT SADDAM HUSSEIN. Difficult, isn't it? Maybe you should wipe that red cloud from before your eyes before you go charging off with your army and try to think clearly for a while. Since you brought up the "1st punch, 2nd punch, 3rd punch", would you care to tell me what they relate to in the real world? Go on, tell me what Saddam's punches against the US were. And don't go throwing in the invasion of Kuwait, because you did the exact same thing in many countries and it doesn't have any bearing on YOU.


and you are right, but we should have removed saddam from the gene pool 10 years, that was our mistake for not doing it, but hey we are only human, we do make mistakes.


------------------
Her Royal Bitchness Eye Aeturnum
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Postby Gormal » Sun Jan 05, 2003 2:06 pm

Hey Cherzra... the reason that every conflict in the last 40 years doesn't fall under your defenition of "war" is because you watch too much television. America will never again fight a war like Vietnam or either of the world wars. We will overwhelm them as quickly as possible while risking the minimal American lives. In other words... we bomb the holy hell out of them then send in a few troops to clean it up afterwards.

I find it amusing that people always bitch and cry conspiracy when the government refuses to show proof of things. God forbid there might be a reason they don't show you that doesn't involve a personal agenda. We elect our leaders to do a job that requires tons of secrecy. We didn't put them their to tell us how they obtained information or the details of our intelligence world. Get real morons.

Iraq at the moment is a direct threat to national security. Korea is an indirect and emerging threat. You deal with the dude brandishing the gun in your face before the asshole behind him still loading his. Bush has to clean up alot of mess in the middle east while keeping the oil we need flowing. If Saddam wasn't in control of something we needed this would be no different then afghanistan... we'd blow em to hell.


------------------
Gormal Stoneforge -Hammerstrike-

"Forward Mithrilguard!"

[This message has been edited by Gormal (edited 01-05-2003).]
Jegzed
Sojourner
Posts: 1240
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Jegzed » Sun Jan 05, 2003 2:26 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gormal:
<B>If Saddam wasn't in control of something we needed this would be no different then afghanistan... we'd blow em to hell.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree in principle, but not for the reason you give.

Oil rules the world, without oil our way of life stops cold.

Saudiarabia and Russia controls most of the oil of the world.

USA is not attacking Iraq right away because of two things only.

1) They don't want to risk the regime in Saudi being taken over my fanatics. (Of course the US could military occupy the arabian peninsula to guarantee the oil flow, but the cost would be astronomical.)

2) Russia invested a shitload of money in Iraq, and they want their money back or guaranteed safe by the US. And nobody pisses off a nation with enough ICBMs to destroy the planet a few times.


On the Iraq/N.Korea issue. N.Korea IS "protected" by the Chinese, as they consider it their sphere of influence.
Sure the USA would probably win a war against China, but the costs would be soo big that the British costs in WW2 would be considered light.



------------------
/Jegzed - Sorcere Master - Crimson Coalition
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Sun Jan 05, 2003 2:45 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gormal:
<B>I find it amusing that people always bitch and cry conspiracy when the government refuses to show proof of things. God forbid there might be a reason they don't show you that doesn't involve a personal agenda. Get real morons.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In other words, they can do as they like and act outside of the normal justice system? They don't have to abide by the same laws as everyone else? And here I was almost believing that you were the pinnacle of fairness, the epitomy of democracy!

Let's see, the whole world is doubting your having proof. This severely hampers your ability to actually go to war. Yet I am to believe that for some "higher" reason Bush keeps this "evidence" secret, only making things hard for himself?

You said it nicely.

Get Real.

<B> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Iraq at the moment is a direct threat to national security. Korea is an indirect and emerging threat. You deal with the dude brandishing the gun in your face before the asshole behind him still loading his.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then I must have missed the reports that prove Iraq will have nuclear capabilities within 3 weeks, because North Korea will have them in 4. North Korea also has missiles that have a decent range, while Iraq doesn't. Dozens of experts and organisations have said that Iraq will not have anything remotely near nuclear weapons within 5 years.

"Iraq is a direct threat to national security" ... rofl.

<B> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Bush has to clean up alot of mess in the middle east while keeping the oil we need flowing. If Saddam wasn't in control of something we needed this would be no different then afghanistan... we'd blow em to hell.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"while keeping the oil we need flowing"

"If Saddam wasn't in control of something we need"

Exactly. You made my point for me. Oil, that's all that greedy retard Bush is after.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Sun Jan 05, 2003 4:54 pm

cherzra, once again, it does not matter what the world thinks. Foreign relations is not a democracy. Your views are understandable because you are european and thus are a citizen of a region with diminished power. When america was weak relative to Europe in the 19th century, they were big proponents of international law and bilateralism as well. Much more so than the strong european powers of the time. It is not surprising that europeans and perhaps others in the world are nervous that those cowboy americans aren't waiting for permission to use their strength.

One thing you are discounting is the possibility that a single power, acting unilateraly and unrestrained, might decide to do the RIGHT thing. You are focusing on the process, and rightly so. Its a threat to the European concept of balance of power to even have one country accumulate so much wealth and strength. As a matter of process, it is important to you that there be some sort of limiting factor. You are concerned because your conception, of a limiting factor, the UN, has been undermined by the fact that it is basically being ignored by the US. But once again, this doesnt mean that as a matter of substance, what america is doing is wrong. Unfortunately, I do not remember who said it, but the most applicable quote ive heard in a while is the following:

"For the first time in existance, you have a country with the power to take over the entire world, but has merely said 'to hell with it'".

We're not imperialists. Look at the first gulf war. We liberated (yes.. you hate that word dont you) Kuwait and rather than keep the oil to ourselves, which we *certainly* could have done, we handed it right back to the Kuwaitis. As for other recent conflicts, I'd say most of the people in the balkans and afghanistan are mightily happy that the US got involved. And hell.. if we had even a little bit of imperialist blood we'd be taxing them silly right now.

Corth

------------------
Goddamned slippery mage.
Guest

Postby Guest » Sun Jan 05, 2003 5:56 pm

I love to hate the way Cherzra despises the USA, yet he's devoted his entire life to an American mud run by an American patriot.

Cherzra don't you realize your fraternizing with and helping the enemy!

In all reality at the end of the day, the USA is the modern-day equivalent of the Roman empire. Cept in our time, we rule by financial might and quell all uprisings militarily. In that way, we can lie and say we don't impose our culture and values on others when thats exactly what we're doing via the various forms of media.. The funny part is, it's the European broadcast agencies that buy the American programming that has so effectively assimilated much of the world.

You can hate us all you want Cherzra, but this is America's time - the time when we rule over most of the world and when our culture, literature, and science dominate the planet. Sure there are other powerful countries these days liek China and Russia and I respect them for their strength - but history will remember this as America's time.

We're #1 Cherzie, suck it and hate it all you want, quote from thousands of articles proclaiming us the devil, but at the end of the day - You spend your entire life on Computers (and thier microchips) that we Invented, you spend most of your life reading and writing in Our language, and playing on an American mud.

So without a doubt, YOU have been assimilated, resitance WAS futile. You may return to your alcove now, I need a beer.

CACKLE! USA!

O_O
cherzra
Sojourner
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Holland

Postby cherzra » Sun Jan 05, 2003 7:08 pm

Uhm... the British were speaking English before you. The only reason you speak it, is because they colonized the US.
Guest

Postby Guest » Sun Jan 05, 2003 7:18 pm

That was a poor retort, even for you Cherz!

The seed for the US lay in many nations and peoples, for which we are thankful by making citizens of the best and brigtest of their nations - who come to live and work in the USA. Image

Oh and BTW you dont read England's version of english all day and night, you read ours (USAs) - the bastardized, slanged version. I bet that 99.9% of the english you read and write is in Our broken format.. Oh thats right, our version is the one taught in almost every nation around the world! What was I worried about?

Theres a reason we Americans dont bother to learn other languages - we don't have to! You do all that dog work for us so that You can speak in Our language. of course, thats just as it should be. Image

The Patriot



[This message has been edited by Miax (edited 01-05-2003).]

Return to “S3 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests